GH1 sample footy and pricing

Ian-T said:
how is it that some folks can get fascinating shots with the D90 and others are just ordinary?
Click to expand...
hold on, i need to finish my symphony before i can reply. i just saw a documentary on mozart and that piano thing seems like a very cool toy...

/matt
 
It is amazing how it almost looks as good as an SR11 with 35mm adapter.

Start, the Nikon camera--lens, sensor, processing--is very good for a camera in its price range. DPReview.com gave it 'Highly Recommended'.

It certainly has a DOF and frame rate you'd expect.

However, it also looks like 13Mb/s MPEG2. And it isn't even MPEG2. I-frame only.

Question: Is the HDMI port live during shooting?

Update:

I found a robot HDMI clip. It has screen info on the border but a 950x630 image in the middle. That image is VERY good. As little noise (observed in Lab Mode) as I can recall...a match for the Canon. Resolution at 950x630 showed clear borders, without sharpening, at 1-2 pixel width. Not entirely sure it wasn't enlarged for the HDMI output.
 
Last edited:
Ian-T said:
how is it that some folks can get fascinating shots with the D90 and others are just ordinary? That first clip "Henkell-clip (Long-Version)" looked great and so was the music video. Not that the others looked bad...it's just I'm suprised by the variance in quality. Maybe it's just me.
Click to expand...

I get both and I'm still trying to figure it out.....I think matt has the answer.....I'll pay that one matt.....the beer awaits next time you're in Sydney
 
mattsand said:
hold on, i need to finish my symphony before i can reply. i just saw a documentary on mozart and that piano thing seems like a very cool toy...
Click to expand...
Ha...I guess I should have been more specific about what I was talking about. I meant “compression” when I said ordinary. Sometimes the picture’s compression looks super nice and most other times ….well….it just stinks. I guess it’s nothing that little Neat video can’t fix. As far as body of work….I’ve seen lot’s of great D90 productions. It’s a good motivating tool that’s for sure…but then there’s that fine line 9withthe compression) that just eats at you.
 
It's the variable bitrate that's the killer. I get captures between 7 and 25Mbps and i can't figure out what I have to do to consistently get higher bit rates. maybe wolfgang can enlighten us with some of his wisdom?
 
Ian-T said:
Sometimes the picture’s compression looks super nice and most other times ….well….it just stinks.
Click to expand...
sure it's not the recompression? very mild h.264 compression reduces noise and even sharpens the image quite a bit, while heavier compression of the same kind ruins it.

/matt
 
Well..I think squig makes a good point on the variable bitrate issue. That could very well be what I'm seeing.
 
mattsand said:
sure it's not the recompression? very mild h.264 compression reduces noise and even sharpens the image quite a bit, while heavier compression of the same kind ruins it.

/matt
Click to expand...

I'm talking about straight out of the camera results
 
I have however shot some really nice footage at a low bitrate and some pretty lousy stuff with higher bitrates. Matt mentioned before something about the mjpeg being subtractive or something?
 
squig said:
It's the variable bitrate that's the killer. I get captures between 7 and 25Mbps and i can't figure out what I have to do to consistently get higher bit rates...
Click to expand...

I suppose it´s the same deal as in any jpeg - the more details in the scene the higher data rate you´ll get. Only a shot in the dark...
 
i think it's the opposite. if you have blacks or low light, the vbr starts to subtract giving you a more compressed image. go outside during the day or a well lit area and your stuff looks stunning
 
mattsand said:
Yeah i guess it is a fact that you didn't manage to get good results out of it but where did you get the idea that there was anything productive about that or that we needed enlightment in that respect? I'm very open with the limitations of the camera and so is everybody else here with significant experience (unlike you) so there's plenty of info for anyone to create their own opinion. I guess ultimately its a matter of whether people should listen to the aspiring event videographer or the professional feature filmmaker. A tough call indeed. :-) /matt
Click to expand...

Not everybody is lucky enough to be a volvo driving abba groupie!

I think Nikon are about to release a DFSLR that Matt and John will both like....hard to imagine I know.

Nikon opened the DFSLR pandora's box Canon and Panasonic responded now Nikon have had time to iron out the kinks and they have to up the ante to protect their market share.

The D400 book is out in July and it would be pretty useless without a camera. Nikon if you're listening the top thing on my wishlist 20p thanks.
 
I'm new here and I already noticed that many of you worry waaaay to much about future equipment and less about the art of filmmaking, which takes place in the here and now. I watched some of the fest movies, expecting to see brilliant work after reading so many geeky posts on dvxuser, but I was wrong. From the ones I saw, there were maybe two films worth watching, the rest was more or less catastrophic. All that might sound a bit provocative and harsh, but nevertheless I believe that there's a lot of potential around. Potential which also gets distracted by these absurd discussions about rumors and equipment that hasn't even been produced yet. My two cents.
 
Last edited:
Androwski said:
I'm new here and I already noticed that many of you worry waaaay to much about future equipment and less about the art of filmmaking, which takes place in the here and now. I watched some of the fest movies, expecting to see brilliant work after reading so many geeky posts on dvxuser, but I was wrong. From the ones I saw, there were maybe two films worth watching, the rest was more or less catastrophic. All that might sound a bit provocative and harsh, but nevertheless I believe that there's a lot of potential around. Potential which also gets distracted by these absurd discussions about rumors and equipment that hasn't even been produced yet. My two cents.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the boards. But you aren't the first to preach that and you won't be the last. We're all geeks here, and the geeks are what made RED come into fruition. We are a necessary evil.
 
Digital Film SLR. much preferable to Video Disease SLR

Unfortunately I'm reliant on new technology to make my film. Technology made it possible for me to record an album a millennia ago. Now I wait for the D400.....I did do some work on the script last night, nothing substantial but progress nonetheless.

Give us a break androw we only just got these toys and they are all broken. if it wasn't for this place and the extensive product development of the members the DSLR's would be completely useless.
 
squig said:
more detail=more compression
Click to expand...

Not according to theory and not my experience either. It uses what's called constant quality encoding so if you shoot a plain white wall you get almost zero bitrate, and vice versa. Both extremes lead to artifacts, mosquito noise in high detail and banding/blocking in low. The sweet spot where you get the best bitrate for your content is somewhere inbetween. Well lit scenes with good contrast and moderate detail can look really good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top